Trends in intracranial stenting among medicare beneficiaries in the United States, 2006-2010

Endovascular stenting of medically refractory intracranial arterial stenotic (ICAS) disease (clinical and sonographic study)

Background

Atherosclerotic intracranial arterial stenosis (ICAS) is one of the most common causes of stroke worldwide and is associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke. Patients with a recent transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke and severe stenosis (70 to 99% of the diameter of a major intracranial artery) are at particularly high risk for recurrent stroke in the territory of the stenotic artery (approximately 23% at 1 year) despite medical treatment. Therefore, alternative therapies are urgently needed for these patients.

Objective

To determine the efficacy and safety of angioplasty with stenting in medically refractory ICAS and to compare its effectiveness with optimal medical treatment.

Subjects and methods

Fifty patients with symptomatic ICAS despite medical treatment (i.e, recurrent stroke or TIA) were enrolled and equally randomized in a prospective study where twenty-five patients underwent angioplasty with stenting and twenty-five patients received optimal medical treatment. Clinical assessment with NIHSS and mRS were done at 0, 3, and 6 months, and transracial Doppler (TCD) assessment of ICAS was done at 0 and 3 months after treatment.

Results

The interventional group had a better clinical outcome with mean NIHSS scores (5.2 ± 4.2, 4.43 ± 4.28 and 3.9 ± 4.7) at baseline, 3 and 6 months, respectively, in comparison to the medical group with mean NIHSS (4.5 ± 4.2, 11.42 ± 6.3, and 8.5 ± 5.1) and better functional outcome with mean mRS scores (1.3 ± 0.96, 1.2 ± 1.13, and 1.0 ± 1.13) at baseline, 3 and 6 months, respectively, in comparison to the medical group (0.84 ± 0.75, 2.28 ± 1.2, and 2 ± 1.24). TCD assessment of ICAS showed a marked reduction of the percentage of stenosis on 3 months of follow-up among the interventional groups (only 5.6% had > 70% stenosis) in comparison to the medical group (85.7% had > 70% stenosis). Recurrent ischemic events on 6 months of follow-up were 16% among interventional groups in comparison to 84% among medical groups. The mortality rate was 8% among interventional groups due to subarachnoid hemorrhages (SAH) related to procedure in comparison to 28% among medical groups secondary to ischemic events. The intraoperative success rate was 96% with the failure of stent deployment in 1 patient due to the tortuous anatomy of vessels. Early post interventional complication rate, i.e, SAH was 8%. Late post interventional restenosis and occlusion rates were 8% on 3 months of follow-up.

Conclusion

Endovascular stenting of medically refractory ICAS is more efficacious and effective with better clinical and functional outcomes than optimal medical treatment; however, its safety is still debatable.

Trial registration

Done at ClinicalTrials.gov. Trial ID (NCT Number) NCT04393025.

Comparison of outcomes and utilization of extracranial-intracranial bypass versus intracranial stenting for intracranial stenosis

Background:

Extracranial–intracranial (EC-IC) bypass and intracranial stenting (ICS) are both revascularization procedures that have emerged as treatment options for intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD). This study describes and compares recent trends in utilization and outcomes of intracranial revascularization procedures in the United States using a population-based cohort. It also investigates the association of ICS and EC-IC bypass with periprocedural morbidity and mortality, unfavorable discharge status, length of stay (LOS), and total hospital charges.

Methods:

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried for patients with ICAD who underwent EC-IC bypass or ICS during the years 2004–2010. Patient characteristics, demographics, perioperative complications, outcomes, and discharge data were collected.

Results:

There were 627 patients who underwent ICS and 249 patients who underwent EC-IC bypass. Patients who underwent ICS were significantly older (P < 0.001) with more comorbidities (P = 0.027) than those who underwent EC-IC bypass. Patients who underwent EC-IC bypass experienced higher rates of postprocedure stroke (P = 0.014), but those who underwent ICS experienced higher rates of death (P = 0.006). Among asymptomatic patients, the rates of postprocedure stroke (P = 0.341) and death (P = 0.887) were similar between patients who underwent ICS and those who underwent EC-IC bypass. Among symptomatic patients, however, there was a higher rate of postprocedure stroke in patients who underwent EC-IC bypass (P < 0.001) and a higher rate of death among patients who underwent ICS (P = 0.015).

Conclusion:

The ideal management of patients with ICAD cannot yet be defined. Although much data from randomized and prospective trials on revascularization have been collected, many questions remain unanswered. There still remain cohorts of patients, specifically patients who have failed aggressive medical management, where not enough evidence is available to dictate decision-making. In order to further elucidate the safety and efficacy of these intracranial revascularization procedures, further clinical trials are needed.

Evidence-based de-implementation for contradicted, unproven, and aspiring healthcare practices

Abandoning ineffective medical practices and mitigating the risks of untested practices are important for improving patient health and containing healthcare costs. Historically, this process has relied on the evidence base, societal values, cultural tensions, and political sway, but not necessarily in that order. We propose a conceptual framework to guide and prioritize this process, shifting emphasis toward the principles of evidence-based medicine, acknowledging that evidence may still be misinterpreted or distorted by recalcitrant proponents of entrenched practices and other biases.

National trends in utilization and outcomes of angioplasty and stenting for revascularization in intracranial stenosis

INTRODUCTION

Angioplasty and intracranial stenting (ICS) are both endovascular revascularization procedures that have emerged as treatment options for intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD). Some believe angioplasty alone is better, while others believe stenting is better. This study examines recent trends in utilization and outcomes of angioplasty alone and ICS in the United States using a population-based cohort.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried for patients with ICAD who underwent angioplasty or ICS from 2005 to 2010.

RESULTS

There were 1115 patients (angioplasty: n=495, ICS: n=620) with ICAD who underwent endovascular revascularization. Over time, the number of endovascular revascularization procedures increased. The percentage of symptomatic patients (p=0.015) as well as in the number of comorbidities of patients treated (p<0.001) also increased. Combined post-procedure stroke and death rates were 16% and 28.9% for angioplasty and ICS, respectively (p<0.001). A larger percentage of angioplasty patients presented symptomatically compared to those who underwent ICS (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Angioplasty appears to be associated with higher rates of peri-procedural complications; however, that may represent patient selection bias. Further studies are needed to identify patients who would benefit from revascularization and to clarify the roles of angioplasty and ICS.